7Kh$Fwlyh$Xvwudold6Xuyh/: $jxlghdqgpdqxdoirulpsohphqwdwlrq Dqdo/Vlvdqguhsruwlqj

7KH$FWLYH$XVWUDOLD6XUYH\
$JXLGHDQGPDQXDOIRULPSOHPHQWDWLRQ
DQDO\VLVDQGUHSRUWLQJ
7KH$XVWUDOLDQ,QVWLWXWHRI+HDOWKDQG:HOIDUHLV$XVWUDOLD¶VQDWLRQDOKHDOWKDQGZHOIDUH
VWDWLVWLFVDQGLQIRUPDWLRQDJHQF\7KH,QVWLWXWH¶VPLVVLRQLVWRLPSURYHWKHKHDOWKDQGZHOO
EHLQJRI$XVWUDOLDQVE\LQIRUPLQJFRPPXQLW\GLVFXVVLRQDQGGHFLVLRQPDNLQJWKURXJK
QDWLRQDOOHDGHUVKLSLQGHYHORSLQJDQGSURYLGLQJKHDOWKDQGZHOIDUHVWDWLVWLFVDQGLQIRUPDWLRQ
7KH$FWLYH$XVWUDOLD6XUYH\
$JXLGHDQGPDQXDOIRULPSOHPHQWDWLRQ
DQDO\VLVDQGUHSRUWLQJ
$XVWUDOLDQ,QVWLWXWHRI+HDOWKDQG:HOIDUH
&DQEHUUD
$,+:FDWQR&9'
7KLVZRUNLVFRS\ULJKW$SDUWIURPDQ\XVHDVSHUPLWWHGXQGHUWKH&RS\ULJKW$FWQR
SDUWPD\EHUHSURGXFHGZLWKRXWSULRUZULWWHQSHUPLVVLRQIURPWKH$XVWUDOLDQ,QVWLWXWHRI
+HDOWKDQG:HOIDUH5HTXHVWVDQGHQTXLULHVFRQFHUQLQJUHSURGXFWLRQDQGULJKWVVKRXOGEH
GLUHFWHGWRWKH+HDG0HGLDDQG3XEOLVKLQJ$XVWUDOLDQ,QVWLWXWHRI+HDOWKDQG:HOIDUH*32
%R[&DQEHUUD$&7
$FRPSOHWHOLVWRIWKH,QVWLWXWH¶VSXEOLFDWLRQVLVDYDLODEOHIURPWKH0HGLDDQG3XEOLVKLQJ8QLW
$XVWUDOLDQ,QVWLWXWHRI+HDOWKDQG:HOIDUH*32%R[&DQEHUUD$&7RUYLDWKH
,QVWLWXWH¶VZHEVLWHKWWSZZZDLKZJRYDX
,6%1
6XJJHVWHGFLWDWLRQ
$XVWUDOLDQ,QVWLWXWHRI+HDOWKDQG:HOIDUH$,+:7KH$FWLYH$XVWUDOLD6XUYH\DJXLGH
DQGPDQXDOIRULPSOHPHQWDWLRQDQDO\VLVDQGUHSRUWLQJ&DQEHUUD$,+:
%RDUG&KDLU
'U6DQGUD+DFNHU
'LUHFWRU
'U5LFKDUG0DGGHQ
$Q\HQTXLULHVDERXWRUFRPPHQWVRQWKLVSXEOLFDWLRQVKRXOGEHGLUHFWHGWR
&DUGLRYDVFXODU'LVHDVH'LDEHWHVDQG5LVN)DFWRU0RQLWRULQJ8QLW
*32%R[
&DQEHUUD$&7
3KRQH
3XEOLVKHGE\$XVWUDOLDQ,QVWLWXWHRI+HDOWKDQG:HOIDUH
3ULQWHGE\(OHFW3ULQWLQJ
Contents
Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................vi
1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................1
2 The survey................................................................................................................................2
2.1 The Active Australia Survey .......................................................................................... 2
3 Interviewer training and survey implementation............................................................5

3.1 The National Physical Activity Survey.........................................................................5
3.2 Handy hints for users, researchers, interviewers and analysts.................................5
3.3 Annotated survey questions for interviewers .............................................................7
4 Analysis and reporting of the survey data.......................................................................10

4.1 Measures derived from the Active Australia Survey ...............................................10
4.2 Data structure .................................................................................................................10
4.3 Number of sessions of each activity ............................................................................12
4.4 Total time spent in each activity ..................................................................................12
4.5 Average time spent in each activity ............................................................................13
4.6 Proportion of people doing ‘sufficient’ activity for health.......................................14
4.7 Proportion of people who were sedentary.................................................................17
4.8 Awareness of physical activity messages...................................................................17
5 Background to the survey ...................................................................................................19

5.1 Basis for data development ..........................................................................................20
5.2 Development of the data standards for physical activity, 1997–1999 ....................23
5.3 Current status of the proposed data standards .........................................................28
Appendix 1: Example of CATI survey coding ........................................................................31
Appendix 2: Membership of the Expert Working Group.....................................................40
Appendix 3: Parties invited to be part of the national consultation process ....................41

Bibliography..................................................................................................................................48
v
$FNQRZOHGJPHQWV
0DMRUFRQWULEXWRUVWRWKLVUHSRUWZHUH
7UDF\'L[RQ $XVWUDOLDQ,QVWLWXWHRI+HDOWKDQG:HOIDUH
$QGUHZ6HDUOHV +XQWHU9DOOH\5HVHDUFK)RXQGDWLRQ
:HDFNQRZOHGJHWKHPHPEHUVRIWKH([SHUW:RUNLQJ*URXSZKRGHYHORSHGWKH$FWLYH
$XVWUDOLD6XUYH\
7LP$UPVWURQJ $XVWUDOLDQ,QVWLWXWHRI+HDOWKDQG:HOIDUH
$GULDQ%DXPDQ 8QLYHUVLW\RI1HZ6RXWK:DOHV
0LFKDHO%RRWK 1HZ&KLOGUHQ·V+RVSLWDO
:HQG\%URZQ 8QLYHUVLW\RI1HZFDVWOH
%LOOLH&RUWL 8QLYHUVLW\RI:HVWHUQ$XVWUDOLD
3HWHU&URZH $XVWUDOLDQ%XUHDXRI6WDWLVWLFV
7HUHQFH'Z\HU$0 0HQ]LHV&HQWUHIRU3RSXODWLRQ+HDOWK5HVHDUFK
,DQ)RUG $XVWUDOLDQ6SRUWV&RPPLVVLRQ
&KULV*RUH $XVWUDOLDQ,QVWLWXWHRI6SRUW
3HQQ\*UDKDP 'HSDUWPHQWRI+HDOWKDQG$JHG&DUH
$QGUHZ+LOOV 4XHHQVODQG8QLYHUVLW\RI7HFKQRORJ\
1HYLOOH2ZHQ 'HDNLQ8QLYHUVLW\
7KDQNVDOVRJRWRWKHIROORZLQJSHRSOH
/DXUHQ'L6DOYLD $XVWUDOLDQ,QVWLWXWHRI+HDOWKDQG:HOIDUH
'DYLG'XQVWDQ ,QWHUQDWLRQDO'LDEHWHV,QVWLWXWH
.HUUL(GZDUGV 'HSDUWPHQWRI+HDOWKDQG$JHLQJ
&DWKDULQDYDQ0RRUW 'HSDUWPHQWRI+HDOWKDQG$JHLQJ
$PDQGD1REEV $XVWUDOLDQ,QVWLWXWHRI+HDOWKDQG:HOIDUH
.DWKOHHQ2·%ULHQ $XVWUDOLDQ,QVWLWXWHRI+HDOWKDQG:HOIDUH
$QQH0DULH:DWHUV $XVWUDOLDQ,QVWLWXWHRI+HDOWKDQG:HOIDUH
7KLVUHSRUWZDVIXQGHGE\WKH&RPPRQZHDOWK'HSDUWPHQWRI+HDOWKDQG$JHLQJ
YL
1 Introduction
The Active Australia Survey is designed to measure participation in leisure-time physical
activity and to assess knowledge of current public health messages about the health benefits
of physical activity. It offers a short and reliable set of questions that can be easily
implemented via computer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) techniques or in face-to-
face interviews.
The Active Australia Survey was first developed and nationally implemented in 1997 to
assess the effectiveness of the Active Australia campaign which was being run in New South
Wales at the time in order to promote physical activity. Since then, the survey has been
implemented nationally through the National Physical Activity Surveys in 1999 and 2000
and the Australian Diabetes, Obesity and Lifestyle Study in 1999–00. It has also been used in
several state-based surveys, such as in Queensland, South Australia, and New South Wales.
For more information on surveys of physical activity, see <http://www.aihw.gov.au>.
This manual is designed to provide an overview of the survey. It includes a copy of the
survey, an implementation guide with instructions for interviewers, a guide to the measures
that can be derived from the survey data, information on how these measures are calculated
and examples of how they are usually reported. It also provides background information on
the development of the survey and an example of CATI coding (Appendix 1).
While this manual specifically focuses on the Active Australia Survey, it is worth noting that
other surveys such as the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) National Health Surveys also
collect and present data on participation in physical activity. However the ABS results are
not directly comparable with those of the Active Australia Survey. The key differences
between the two surveys are (AIHW forthcoming):
• The Active Australia questions apply to only one week preceding interview, whereas the
National Health Survey questions apply to the two weeks preceding interview.
• The Active Australia Survey includes walking for transport, whereas the National
Health Surveys do not.
• The Active Australia Survey and the National Health Surveys report levels of
participation using different measures.
For more information on the ABS National Health Surveys see <http://www.abs.gov.au>.
1
2 The survey
This section presents the core questions in the Active Australia Survey. These consist of
eight questions to assess participation in various types of activity and five statements to
assess awareness of current public health messages about physical activity.
The core questions are usually supplemented by questions collecting demographic
information (age, sex, and household information). See Armstrong et al. 2000 for examples
of demographic information collected. Questions about other characteristics such as height
and weight, or items of particular interest such as awareness of local interventions or use of
facilities for physical activity may also be added to the survey. The questions were
developed and intended for use with persons aged 18–75 years.
2.1 The Active Australia Survey

The next questions are about any physical activities that you may have done in the last
week:
1. In the last week, how many times have you walked continuously, for at least
10 minutes, for recreation, exercise or to get to or from places?
times
2. What do you estimate was the total time that you spent walking in this way in the last
week?
In hours and/or minutes
minutes
hours
3. In the last week, how many times did you do any vigorous gardening or heavy work
around the yard, which made you breathe harder or puff and pant?
times
2
4. What do you estimate was the total time that you spent doing vigorous gardening or
heavy work around the yard in the last week?
minutes
hours
The next questions exclude household chores, gardening or yardwork:

5. In the last week, how many times did you do any vigorous physical activity which made
you breathe harder or puff and pant? (e.g. jogging, cycling, aerobics, competitive tennis)
times
6. What do you estimate was the total time that you spent doing this vigorous physical
activity in the last week?
minutes
hours
7. In the last week, how many times did you do any other more moderate physical
activities that you have not already mentioned? (e.g. gentle swimming, social tennis,
golf)
times
3
8. What do you estimate was the total time that you spent doing these activities in the last
week?
minutes
hours
To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about physical
activity and health?
9(a) Taking the stairs at work or generally being more active for at least 30 minutes each day
is enough to improve your health.
strongly disagree neither agree agree strongly agree
disagree nor disagree
9(b) Half an hour of brisk walking on most days is enough to improve your health.
9(c) To improve your health it is essential for you to do vigorous exercise for at least
20 minutes each time, three times a week.
9(d) Exercise doesn’t have to be done all at one time—blocks of 10 minutes are okay.
9(e) Moderate exercise that increases your heart rate slightly can improve your health.
4
3 Interviewer training and survey implementation
This section provides a guide to implementing the Active Australia Survey in the field. First,
the procedure used to implement the National Physical Activity Surveys is briefly described.
Next, there are some handy hints for users, researchers, interviewers and analysts,
highlighting common problems that may arise and suggesting ways to minimise reporting
errors. Finally, the eight core questions for assessing physical activity participation are
reproduced, along with tips for interviewers.
3.1 The National Physical Activity Survey

The National Physical Activity Survey was conducted in 1997 (often referred to as the Active
Australia Baseline Survey), 1999 and 2000 (Bauman et al. 2001; Armstrong et al. 2000; ASC
1998). The three surveys were conducted at exactly the same period of the year (the last two
weeks of November and first two weeks of December) to ensure that participation rates
were not affected by seasonal conditions. This survey period was also before the summer
holiday period, because participation rates during holiday periods may be influenced by
increased leisure time. Each year, the survey consisted of the Active Australia core survey
questions listed in the previous section, plus some supplementary questions covering
demographics, height and weight, recognition and recall of specific physical activity
promotional messages and participation in related organised activities such as Active
Australia Day.
The survey method was a random sample population telephone survey (using CATI
methodology) conducted by the Hunter Valley Research Foundation. The electronic
white pages were used to generate a random sample of households, and an adult aged 18–75
years was then randomly selected from within each household. Participation was voluntary.
Those who participated were asked a series of questions (lasting about
10 minutes) on their participation in, and knowledge and understanding of physical activity.
An example of the CATI coding used in the 1999 survey is presented in Appendix 1. More
detailed information regarding survey methodology can be found in Armstrong et al. 2000.
3.2 Handy hints for users, researchers, interviewers and analysts

This section presents some common problems that may arise when implementing the Active
Australia Survey and some suggestions for dealing with these problems and minimising
reporting errors.
Common difficulties
Difficulties may include:
• ensuring the respondent understands the meaning of the questions
• ensuring that ineligible activities are not included in the respondent’s answers
• ensuring that eligible activities are correctly classified (i.e. as walking, vigorous
yardwork, other vigorous or other moderate activities)
• ensuring that the answers recorded are meaningful and plausible.
5
Suggestions to minimise errors
• Adhere to the chosen random sampling methodology. In the National Physical Activity
Surveys, the following procedure is used:
– Randomly select households (from the white pages of the telephone directory).
– Determine the number of eligible persons in the household.
– Identify the desired respondent using some random choice method, e.g. next
birthday.
– Do not substitute if this person is not available. This may lead to substantial
selection bias and invalidate the results of the survey.
– Use callbacks to speak with the correct person. A minimum of six is suggested.
• Thorough interviewer training is essential. Incorporate examples of the types of answers
which may be expected and allow for all interviewers to test the questionnaire as both
interviewer and respondent. Also stress the importance of the random sampling
method and the need to interview only the chosen person; substitutions will introduce
selection bias and affect the extent to which estimates derived from the survey can be
generalised.
• Ensure that the types of activities that are eligible are clearly understood. This relates
especially to occupational activity. It may be decided that walking as an occupational
activity can be included (e.g. postal delivery workers, pedestrian police); however, the
need for the activity to be continuous in 10-minute intervals must be stressed to both
the interviewer and the respondent.
• Make sure that the interviewer is aware of the difference between moderate and
vigorous activities and how various activities are classified (e.g. squash would be a
vigorous activity but cricket would be a moderate activity). It may be helpful to
consider the effect an activity has on breathing or heart rate as a rough guide to its
intensity; a moderate activity will make you breathe somewhat harder than normal and
slightly increase heart rate, and a vigorous activity will make you breathe much harder
than normal and have a greater effect on heart rate. Activities which cannot be classified
during the interview should be noted (along with details of time and sessions) for
referral to the supervisor.
• Researchers and trainers may find the Compendium of Physical Activities useful as a guide
to intensity classification (Ainsworth et al. 2000). According to this guide, activities with
an intensity of 3–6 METs* are classified as moderate, and those with intensity greater
than 6 METs are classified as vigorous.
• Ensure that the hours/minutes sections are correctly recorded, e.g. to record 1 hour of
activity, fill in 1 hour or 60 minutes but not both.
• Each interviewer should be supplied with paper and pen, and a calculator if necessary,
to make notes for the supervisor or to help the respondent calculate total time spent in
each activity.
• Make sure that the ‘number of times’ is always completed, i.e. enter zero (0) rather than
leave blank for respondents who do not participate in a particular activity.
*1 MET = the resting metabolic rate, equivalent to oxygen uptake of 3.5 mL/kg/hr.
6
• Be alert for logical inconsistencies in the data. For example, a person who reports five
sessions of walking must have recorded a total time of at least 50 minutes to satisfy the
‘continuously for at least 10 minutes’ wording of the question.
• Clarify answers which may seem implausible, e.g. reporting one vigorous activity
session and a total time of 4 hours.
• Where a CATI system is being used, notes on the screen relating to the current question
may be helpful, e.g. types of eligible activities.
• Limiting data entry fields may be helpful, e.g. limit the hours of activity field from
0 to 14 as per the truncation rules. Answers which, after clarification from the
respondent, are still outside the limits should be noted by the interviewer and assessed
later by the research team.
3.3 Annotated survey questions for interviewers

In this section, the eight core questions for assessing participation in physical activity are
reproduced, annotated with tips to improve data collection and to help answer respondents’
queries. No specific instruction is necessary for the five ‘awareness’ questions except to
suggest that, as in the three national surveys, the statements are presented in random order
to reduce bias which may result from the order in which the statements are presented.
The next questions are about any physical activities that you may have done in the last
week:
1. In the last week, how many times have you walked continuously, for at least
10 minutes, for recreation, exercise or to get to or from places?
times
Interviewer: Stress that this must be continuous walking, i.e. for at least 10 minutes
without stopping.
2. What do you estimate was the total time that you spent walking in this way in the last
week?
minutes
hours
Interviewer: If the respondent appears to be having difficulty in totalling the time over
the entire week, you could assist by prompting for a time each day and adding them
yourself, e.g. ‘Did you walk on Monday? How long did you spend walking on Monday?
And did you walk on Tuesday? For how long?’
7
3. In the last week, how many times did you do any vigorous gardening or heavy work
around the yard, which made you breathe harder or puff and pant?
times
Interviewer: The types of activities which may be included in this section could include
heavy digging, tree lopping, landscaping (e.g. pushing a wheelbarrow or moving large
rocks), pushing a lawn mower and using a hand saw.
4. What do you estimate was the total time that you spent doing vigorous gardening or
heavy work around the yard in the last week?
minutes
hours
Interviewer: As for the walking question, if the respondent is having trouble providing a
total time, assist them by prompting for a time each day.
The next questions exclude household chores, gardening or yardwork:

5. In the last week, how many times did you do any vigorous physical activity which made
you breathe harder or puff and pant? (e.g. jogging, cycling, aerobics, competitive tennis)
times
Interviewer: The types of activities which might be reported here, in addition to the
above examples, include football (of all types), hockey, squash, cross-country skiing,
cross-country hiking (i.e. rough or steep terrain), weight lifting, boxing, rock climbing,
basketball, netball, gymnastics, using a rowing machine, martial arts, high-impact and
step aerobics.
8
6. What do you estimate was the total time that you spent doing this vigorous physical
activity in the last week?
minutes
hours
Interviewer: Again, prompt the respondent for daily times if they are having difficulty
calculating a weekly total.
7. In the last week, how many times did you do any other more moderate physical
activities that you have not already mentioned? (e.g. gentle swimming, social tennis,
golf)
times
Interviewer: The types of activities which might be expected, in addition to the above
examples, include dancing, badminton, table tennis, horseback riding, canoeing,
kayaking, volleyball, cricket, baseball or softball, downhill skiing, cross-training, surfing
and windsurfing.
8. What do you estimate was the total time that you spent doing these activities in the last
week?
minutes
hours
Interviewer: Again, assist the respondent with adding daily times if necessary.
9
4 Analysis and reporting of the survey data
This section describes the types of measures that can be constructed from the survey data
and provides instructions on how each of these measures is derived. Details and examples of
the usual method of reporting each measure are also provided. Although the examples of
usual reporting method present the data in table form, it is also possible, and can be more
informative, to present these data graphically. An example of a graphical presentation is
provided. These methods and measures were used in reporting the results of the three
National Physical Activity Surveys and other national and state surveys that used the Active
Australia questions. With appropriate adjustments for sample demographics, use of these
same measures allows comparisons to be made between new and previously published
results.
For more examples of survey data presentation see Armstrong et al. 2000.
4.1 Measures derived from the Active Australia Survey

A number of different measures of participation in physical activity during the previous
week can be derived from the survey data. These include:
• number of sessions of physical activity
• total time spent in each activity
• average time spent in each activity
• proportion of people who were doing a sufficient amount of activity to gain health
benefits
• proportion of people who were sedentary.
The methods of constructing and reporting on each of these measures will be described in
turn.
The other measures that can be derived from the survey data relate to awareness of the
current public health messages about physical activity and health. The awareness section of
the survey consists of five statements about physical activity and health. Survey respondents
are asked to indicate to what extent they agree with each of the statements. The methods of
analysing and reporting these data are also described below.
4.2 Data structure

This section describes the structure of the survey data and defines the variables used in this
document.
Participation in physical activity

For each activity type there are two questions—number of sessions and time per week.
Usually the time is recorded in hours and/or minutes, so for each activity type there will be
two time variables—hours and minutes.
10
For example, a data set would have 12 variables as follows:
walksess number of sessions walking
walkhrs number of hours walking
walkmins number of minutes walking
gardsess number of sessions of vigorous gardening/yardwork
gardhrs number of hours of vigorous gardening/yardwork
gardmins number of minutes of vigorous gardening/yardwork
vigsess number of sessions of other vigorous activities
vighrs number of hours of other vigorous activities
vigmins number of minutes of other vigorous activities
modsess number of sessions of other moderate activities
modhrs number of hours of other moderate activities
modmins number of minutes of other moderate activities
These variable names will be used in this document to illustrate formulas for constructing
measures to assess participation in physical activity.
Awareness of physical activity messages

For the awareness section of the survey there will be five variables, corresponding to the five
statements on physical activity and health. In this document, the following variables will be
used to refer to the five statements:
pamess1 Taking the stairs at work or generally being more active for at least
30 minutes each day is enough to improve your health.
pamess2 Half an hour of brisk walking on most days is enough to improve your
health.
pamess3 To improve your health, it is essential for you to do vigorous exercise for at
least 20 minutes each time, three times a week.
pamess4 Exercise doesn’t have to be done all at one time—blocks of 10 minutes are
okay.
pamess5 Moderate exercise that increases your heart rate slightly can improve your
health.
Respondents are asked to indicate to what extent they agree with each of these statements,
and the answers are usually coded numerically in the following manner:
1 = Strongly agree
2 = Agree
3 = Neither agree nor disagree
4 = Disagree
5 = Strongly disagree
11
4.3 Number of sessions of each activity
This measure describes the number of sessions of physical activity people participated in
during the previous week. Because this relates to a single question for each activity type
(walking, other moderate activities, vigorous gardening/yardwork, other vigorous
activities), the variables walksess, gardsess, vigsess and modsess defined in the previous
section may be used without modification.
Usual reporting method

Usually, data on number of activity sessions are presented separately for each activity type,
as the proportion of people participating in various numbers of activity sessions.
For example, the variable ‘walksess’ may be split into four categories: 0, 1–2, 3–4 and 5 or
more. Then the data presented would be the proportion of the population falling into each of
those categories. It may also be useful to separate the data into subgroups, for example by
age group or sex, as shown in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1: Sessions of physical activity in the previous week, by sex (per cent)
Physical activity Men Women Persons
Walking
Nil 25.4 20.2 22.8
1–2 18.3 19.4 18.8
3–4 12.6 23.5 18.1
5 or more 43.7 36.9 40.3
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0
4.4 Total time spent in each activity

This is a measure of the total amount of time spent in physical activity during the previous
week. This is useful for describing population patterns of the time spent in different types of
activities.
Total time in minutes for each activity is calculated by multiplying the hours by 60 and
adding the minutes:
walktime = (walkhrs x 60) + walkmins
gardtime = (gardhrs x 60) + gardmins
vigtime = (vighrs x 60) + vigmins
modtime = (modhrs x 60) + modmins
Total time in hours would be calculated by dividing the minutes variable by 60 and adding
the hours variable, or by dividing the total time in the minutes variable derived above by 60.
To avoid errors due to over-reporting, any times greater than 840 minutes (14 hours) for a
single activity type are recoded to 840 minutes. Missing values are not imputed.
12
Total time spent in activity is usually reported by presenting the average of total time over a
population or subgroup. Instructions on how to derive and report the average time are
shown below.
4.5 Average time spent in each activity

This measure is used to illustrate the population distribution of the total time spent in
activity. Note that the question assessing moderate activity other than walking has been
found to have low validity (Brown et al. 2002) and therefore should not be reported on its
own, although it is still used when calculating ‘sufficient’ activity and can be combined with
the walking question as a measure of total moderate activity.
The average time per week spent in each of the activity types (walking, other moderate
activities, vigorous gardening/yardwork, other vigorous activities) can be calculated as the
sum of total times reported divided by the relevant number in the sample. This number can
be calculated in two ways, depending on the desired measure: as the average for the overall
population, or as the average for people participating in a particular activity type.
Note that vigorous activity time is not doubled when calculating these measures; this is only
undertaken when calculating time for deriving ‘sufficient’ activity (see section 4.6).
Overall population average

The average time spent by the overall population in a particular activity is calculated by
taking the sum of the total time spent in the activity and dividing it by the number of people
reporting valid answers to the questions for that activity type. This includes all people
reporting activity times of up to 840 minutes (after times greater than 840 minutes have been
recoded, as specified previously) as well as those reporting no participation in the activity
(i.e. number of sessions = 0).
People who did not answer the questions relating to a particular activity type are excluded
from the calculations for that activity, as are those who reported at least one session of the
activity but have no time recorded for it.
For example, the population average time spent walking would be calculated as follows:
avgwalk1 = sum(walktime)/(number{0<walktime<=840} + number{walksess=0})
where number{criteria} indicates number of people satisfying the criteria.
Average for people reporting participation

The average time for those people who participated in a particular activity type is calculated
by taking the sum of the total time spent in activity and dividing it by the number of people
reporting a total activity time of up to 840 minutes (after times greater than 840 minutes
have been recoded).
People who did not answer the questions relating to a particular activity type are excluded
from the calculations for that activity. People who did not participate in the activity (number
of sessions = 0) are also excluded, as are those who reported at least one session of the
activity but have no time recorded for it.
13
For example, the average time spent walking among those people who walked would be
calculated as follows:
avgwalk2 = sum(walktime)/number{0<walktime<=840}
where number{criteria} indicates number of people satisfying the criteria.

The distribution of activity times is generally highly skewed, so it is usual to report the 75th
and 95th percentiles in addition to the mean. The 25th percentile, median and the minimum
and maximum values may also be of interest. For the total sample, the median value may be
zero because of the inclusion of non-participating people in the calculations. The data may
be analysed and presented separately by age, sex, or other characteristics of interest, as
shown in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2: Total time (minutes) in physical activity during the previous
week, by sex
Walking Vigorous intensity
Males Females Males Females
Mean 125 143 70 54
75th percentile 160 165 85 68

95th percentile 583 604 126 74
4.6 Proportion of people doing ‘sufficient’ activity for health

This is a measure of the proportion of the population who reported participating in physical
activity at levels sufficient to confer a health benefit. It provides an indication of the number
of people obtaining the health benefits of physical activity, and conversely an indication of
the number of people not obtaining these benefits and hence at increased risk of poor health
outcomes.
For the purposes of calculating ‘sufficient’ activity for health, we are interested in
participation in walking, moderate activity, and vigorous activity. Gardening is not included
in the calculation of sufficient activity, as there is limited research on the validity of the self-
reported intensity of these activities (Armstrong et al. 2000).
There are two different ways of calculating ‘sufficient’ activity for health. These are:
(a) the accumulation of a sufficient amount of activity over a week
(b) the accumulation of a sufficient amount of activity by participation in a sufficient
number of sessions over a week.
The National Physical Activity Guidelines for Australians (DHAC 1999) recommend that, to
achieve health benefits, a person should participate in 30 minutes of at least moderate-
intensity physical activity on most days of the week. For the purposes of calculating
‘sufficient’ activity, this is interpreted as 30 minutes on at least 5 days of the week; a total of
at least 150 minutes of activity per week. Therefore the two definitions of ‘sufficient’ above
become:
14
(a) the accumulation of at least 150 minutes of activity over 1 week
(b) the accumulation of at least 150 minutes of activity and at least 5 sessions of activity
over 1 week.
Calculating total activity time

Total time in activity overall is calculated, as shown below, by adding the time spent in
walking and moderate activity and twice the time spent in vigorous activity (not including
gardening and yardwork). The time spent in vigorous activity is doubled because vigorous
activity is more intense and so confers greater health benefits than moderate activity
(Armstrong et al. 2000).
sufftime = walktime + modtime + (2 x vigtime)
To avoid errors due to over-reporting, total times in all activities that are greater than 1680
minutes (28 hours) are recoded to 1680 mins.
Calculating total activity sessions

Total sessions are calculated by adding the number of sessions of walking, moderate activity
and vigorous activity (not including gardening, as before), as shown below:
suffsess = walksess + modsess + vigsess
Identifying people participating in ‘sufficient’ activity
(a) Sufficient time

For calculation of sufficient activity using time only, the data are grouped into three
categories based on total activity time. Participation in at least 150 minutes per week is
classified as ‘sufficient’. People who are doing no activity at all are classed as sedentary. The
remainder are classed as ‘insufficient’—that is, they are participating in some activity but
not enough to obtain a health benefit. This results in the following classification:
sufftime = 0 sedentary
1 <= sufftime <= 149 insufficiently active
sufftime >= 150 sufficiently active for health.
(b) Sufficient time and sessions

The second definition of ‘sufficient’ activity for health includes both the time and number of
sessions of activity. As before, people doing no activity at all are classed as sedentary. People
doing at least 150 minutes of activity over at least five sessions are classed as ‘sufficient’. The
remainder are classed as ‘insufficient’—that is, participating in some activity but either not
enough in total or not regularly enough to obtain a health benefit.
15
The data are grouped into three categories as follows:
sufftime = 0 sedentary
1 <= sufftime <= 149
OR
sufftime >= 150 and suffsess < 5
} insufficiently active
sufftime >= 150 and suffsess >= 5 sufficiently active for health
There are some problems with this measure in that it assumes each session is undertaken on
a different day. Further, the length of time spent in each session is unknown. Therefore the
activity may not equate to 30 minutes per day over 5 days. However, it is the best
approximation to the guidelines available using the current survey questions.

These data are usually reported by presenting the proportion of people in each of the three
categories defined above. Alternatively, the proportions of people who are sedentary and
insufficiently active can be combined and presented to show the total number of people who
are not sufficiently active for health. As for the other measures described in this document,
the data can be analysed and presented separately by age group, sex, or any other
characteristics of interest. Tables 3.3 and 3.4 and Figure 3.1 provide examples.
Table 3.3: Percentage of people achieving ‘sufficient’ time during the previous
week, by sex
Sedentary Insufficient ‘Sufficient’*
Sex
Men 15.1 24.8 60.1

Women 15.9 31.6 52.5
Persons 15.4 27.4 57.2
∗ ‘Sufficient’ time is defined as 150 minutes per week, using the sum of walking, moderate activity and vigorous
activity (weighted by two).
Table 3.4: Percentage of people achieving ‘sufficient’ time and sessions during the
previous week, by age group
Sedentary Insufficient ‘Sufficient’*
Age group (years)
18–29 8.7 39.6 51.7

30–44 13.6 42.4 44.0
45–59 19.4 40.2 40.4
60–75 22.1 38.3 39.6
All ages 16.1 40.3 43.6
∗ ‘Sufficient’ time and sessions is defined as 150 minutes (using the sum of walking, moderate activity and vigorous
activity (weighted by two)) and five sessions of activity per week.
16
Per cent
100
90 Men
Women
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
18–29 30–44 45–59 60–75 All ages
Age group (years)
Figure 3.1: Percentage of people achieving ‘sufficient‘ time during the previous week
4.7 Proportion of people who were sedentary

This is a measure of the proportion of the population who reported no leisure-time physical
activity or walking during the previous week. This gives an indication of the number of
people who are at increased risk of poor health because of inactivity.
The proportion of people who were sedentary can be obtained from the calculations for
sufficient activity described previously. Alternatively, people who were sedentary can be
identified by adding the time spent in walking, moderate and vigorous activities (not
including gardening and yardwork) as follows:
tottime = walktime + modtime + vigtime
Any person who has tottime = 0 is classified as sedentary.

The proportion of people sedentary is usually presented in a table or graph, grouped by age,
sex or other characteristics of interest, similar to the method for reporting proportion
undertaking ‘sufficient’ activity.
4.8 Awareness of physical activity messages

This is a measure of the extent to which people recognise and acknowledge the current
public health messages concerning physical activity and health. It indicates the success (or
otherwise) of the promotion of physical activity messages in the community.
17
For each statement, the response variable provides five categories of agreement, and these
can be considered as they are without modification as numbers or proportions of people
strongly agreeing, agreeing, disagreeing, strongly disagreeing, or having no opinion about
the statements. However, if a message has been very successful in its uptake by the
community, the number of people in the ‘disagree’ and ‘strongly disagree’ categories may be
extremely small. Therefore it is usual to group the five agreement categories into two: one
for those who agree or strongly agree with the statement, and the other for those who do not
agree or have no opinion. This indicates the number of people who are aware of and accept
the relevant public health message, which is commonly the most desired information for
assessing the impact of promotional efforts. Alternatively, examination of the characteristics
of the group that do not agree with the messages may indicate possible target groups for
different or more focused interventions.

The data on awareness of physical activity messages is usually presented in a table, showing
the percentage of people who agree or strongly agree with each statement. As with each of
the other measures described, the data can be presented by age group, sex or other
characteristics of interest. Table 3.5 gives an example.
Table 3.5: Percentage of people agreeing (combined ‘strongly agree’ and ‘agree’) with knowledge
statements, by sex
Message 1 Message 2 Message 3 Message 4 Message 5
Sex
Men 84.6 87.7 70.1 71.6 94.6

Women 91.3 93.8 63.8 75.1 96.3
Persons 87.4 89.9 66.4 73.2 95.1
Message 1: Taking the stairs at work or generally being more active for at least 30 minutes each day is enough to improve your health.
Message 2: Half an hour of brisk walking on most days is enough to improve your health.
Message 3: To improve your health, it is essential for you to do vigorous exercise for at least 20 minutes each time, three times a week.
Message 4: Exercise doesn’t have to be done all at one time—blocks of 10 minutes are okay.
Message 5: Moderate exercise that increases your heart rate slightly can improve your health.
18
5 Background to the survey
This section provides an overview of the development of the Active Australia Survey. The
material is sourced from a document written to chart the progress of the development of
data standards for physical activity measurement (AIHW: Dixon T unpublished). This
provides some background information about the importance of physical activity, the
framework for national data standards, and ways in which physical activity is measured. It
also describes the means by which the questions in the Active Australia Survey were
developed.
In 1997, the Commonwealth Department of Health and Family Services (now Department of
Health and Ageing) commissioned the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) to
develop national data standards, methods and definitions for the measurement of physical
activity and health, with a view to including these in the National Health Data Dictionary
(NHDD) and the National Health Information Knowledgebase (now known as the
Knowledgebase). This would assist in the collection of uniform, standardised data for
physical activity among Australian adults.
To facilitate this project, the Expert Working Group on Physical Activity Measurement (the
Expert Group) was established by the AIHW. During the following 2 years, the Expert
Group reviewed existing physical activity measures, examined the issues surrounding
measurement of physical activity, undertook related research and consulted widely with
various interested bodies and experts, both in Australia and overseas, before identifying a
number of data elements (discrete items of information or variables) necessary for physical
activity measurement. These were:
• Physical activity (data concept)
• Physical activity—context
• Physical activity—duration
• Physical activity—frequency
• Physical activity—intensity
• Physical activity—type
• Physical activity—health benefit.
The Expert Group considered these elements to be the best available given the evidence and
funding available at the time. In September 1999, the elements were entered with draft
status into the Knowledgebase, but not into the NHDD. This was because of concerns raised
by the National Health Data Committee that the elements did not capture all the desirable
aspects of physical activity, that the questions related to measurement of these elements had
not been validated, and that some members had not had sufficient time and information to
consider them. There was also a concern that once the data elements were included in the
dictionary it could be difficult to alter them should better measures become available.
Concurrently, the Expert Group developed the Active Australia Survey as a means of
collecting data consistent with these elements and evaluating the Active Australia initiative.
The Expert Group drew from questions used in the National Heart Foundation Risk Factor
Prevalence Survey, the ABS National Health Surveys, and the New South Wales State
Health Surveys to develop a series of questions, six of which are used to derive a measure of
physical activity that can be assessed for health benefit. The survey has been used nationally
19
in 1997, 1999 and 2000, and in several state-based surveys. It exhibits good reliability, face
validity, criterion validity and acceptability.
5.1 Basis for data development

This section provides an overview of the importance of physical activity with regard to
health, describes government initiatives promoting physical activity between 1996 and 2001,
and outlines the framework for developing national data standards for measuring physical
activity.
Why is physical activity important?

Physical inactivity is a modifiable behavioural risk factor for coronary heart disease,
ischaemic stroke, type 2 diabetes mellitus, colon cancer and breast cancer. Being physically
active not only reduces the risk of developing these chronic diseases, but also increases
musculoskeletal strength, thus decreasing the risk of falls, improves general wellbeing, and
reduces symptoms of depression, anxiety and stress (Armstrong et al. 2000). Physical
activity therefore has a beneficial association with six of the seven National Health Priority
Areas (cardiovascular disease, diabetes, cancer, mental health, arthritis and musculoskeletal
health, and injury).
Physical inactivity accounts for 7% of the total burden of disease in Australia, second only to
tobacco smoking as a risk factor for ill health (Mathers et al. 1999). It accounts for the highest
burden among females. It is estimated that the direct health-care cost attributable to physical
inactivity is around $377 million per year, with $262 million of this due to cardiovascular
diseases (Stephenson et al. 2000). There is also evidence that physical inactivity is associated
with other risk factors such as overweight and obesity, high blood pressure, and high blood
cholesterol.
Physical activity has therefore become an important public health issue, and there has been
substantial investment in its promotion by the Commonwealth, state and territory
governments, reflected in the establishment of the Active Australia campaign in 1996 and the
National Physical Activity Guidelines for Australians in 1999.
Active Australia
Launched in December 1996 and formally functioning until 2001, Active Australia was a
national public health initiative that aimed to promote regular moderate-intensity physical
activity and to increase participation in sports. It involved a partnership between the
Department of Health and Family Services, the Australian Sports Commission, state and
territory sport and recreation departments and the National Office of Local Government.
Active Australia had three main goals:
• to realise and enhance lifelong participation in physical activity
• to realise the social, health and economic benefits of participation in physical activity
• to develop quality infrastructure, opportunities and services to support participation in
physical activity.
A number of media campaigns were produced under the Active Australia brand, including
the ‘Regularly, not seriously’ tagline in New South Wales, the ‘Rusty’ campaign and other
similar campaigns targeting older Australians in various states.
20
The National Physical Activity Guidelines
The National Physical Activity Guidelines for Australians were established in 1999. These
guidelines outline the level of physical activity considered necessary to achieve a health
benefit (DHAC 1999). They state that adults should accumulate at least 30 minutes of
moderate-intensity physical activity on most, preferably all, days of the week. This
corresponds to current research, where ‘adequate’ physical activity for health benefit is
defined as the accrual of 150 minutes of moderate-intensity physical activity over 1 week.
Research, and the guidelines, also suggest that benefit can result from activity undertaken in
a number of short sessions of 10 minutes rather than a single longer session.
National data standards

In Australia some systems have been developed to facilitate collection of data in a standard
and consistent manner. These include the NHDD and the Knowledgebase, maintained
under the umbrella of the National Health Information Agreement. These, and their
relationship to the development of data standards for measuring physical activity, are
described below. More detailed information can be found on the AIHW web site
<http://www.aihw.gov.au>.
The National Health Data Dictionary

Published annually (10th edition in 2001), the NHDD contains definitions of the data
elements (discrete items of information or variables) currently formally approved by the
National Health Information Management Group (NHIMG). Under the National Health
Information Agreement, the NHDD is the authoritative source of health data definitions
used in Australia where national consistency is required. It is designed to improve the
comparability of data across the health arena. It is also designed to make data collection
activities more efficient by reducing the duplication of effort in the field and more effective
by ensuring information to be collected is appropriate to its purpose. Data elements in the
NHDD can be revised as new evidence becomes available. This encourages users to reach
consensus around common concepts while further research is undertaken. While adherence
to the NHDD standard data element definitions is not mandatory, it is highly recommended
to ensure consistent and comparable data collection.
The Knowledgebase
The Knowledgebase (formerly known as the National Health Information Knowledgebase)
is an electronically accessible health, community services and housing metadata registry
designed and created by the AIHW on behalf of the NHIMG. The core of the health section
of the Knowledgebase is an electronic version of the NHDD. However, the Knowledgebase
also holds information on superseded, retired, abandoned, and draft data elements, which
are not published in the printed NHDD. Details of National Minimum Data Sets, National
Health Performance Indicators and the National Health Information Model are also
available in the Knowledgebase.
The National Health Information Agreement

The National Health Information Agreement, in effect from June 1993 between the
Commonwealth, state and territory health authorities, the ABS and the AIHW, aims to
ensure that the collection, analysis and dissemination of national health information is
undertaken appropriately and efficiently. A project focusing on cardiovascular disease risk
21
factors was established under the National Health Information Work Program, with the
AIHW’s National Centre for Monitoring Cardiovascular Disease as the responsible agency.
The aim of this project was the development of standard definitions and a minimum data set
on the basis of nationally agreed definitions and standards for all agencies collecting and
reporting data on cardiovascular disease risk factors. Subprojects were to be set up for each
specific risk factor, with those for overweight/obesity, smoking and physical activity to be
established first. The expected outputs of these subprojects were data item definitions (data
elements) for each of these risk factors. The processes involved were:
• a literature search and review of means of assessment of the risk factors, measurement
strategies, definitions, standards and measurement issues
• a review of national and international survey techniques and questionnaires
• the establishment of expert working groups to assist with the development of
definitions.
To facilitate the physical activity project, the Expert Working Group on Physical Activity
Measurement (the Expert Group) was established by the AIHW. Members of the Expert
Group included representatives from universities, research centres, government and non-
government organisations, some of whom were concurrently involved in the World Health
Organization project to develop an international physical activity questionnaire (Appendix
2).
Terms of reference of the Expert Working Group on Physical Activity

Measurement
Under the terms of the National Health Information Project, the focus of the Expert Group
was on physical activity as a risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Their terms of reference
were as follows:
• The Expert Group is required to develop standard methods and definitions for
measuring and reporting on the prevalence of physical activity in adults for use in
Australian population surveys and data collections.
• The data elements to be addressed by the Expert Group are adult leisure-time physical
activity. The Expert Group may be required to develop other data elements for adult
leisure-time and adult non-leisure-time physical activity.
• The proposal developed by the Expert Group should conform to the criteria and
recommended formats for input into the NHDD.
• The Expert Group should use a national consultation process to demonstrate consensus.
• The proposal should be submitted to the National Health Data Committee by
November 1997 for inclusion in the NHDD by July 1998.
22
5.2 Development of the data standards for physical activity,
1997–1999
This section provides a brief overview of the various means of measuring physical activity,
outlines the rationale behind the Expert Group’s chosen measure (self-report survey) and
describes the two measures initially developed by the Expert Group. The remainder of the
section follows the continuing development of the preferred measure, including a discussion
of the assessment of ‘sufficient’ activity for health, and describes the process of national
consultation and submission of the data standards to the National Health Data Committee.
Measurement of physical activity

A measure of physical activity is needed to determine the prevalence of physical activity in
the population, to monitor changes over time, and to assess the effect of any interventions.
At the time the Expert Group began their work, there were no nationally accepted uniform
procedures for collecting or analysing data on physical activity. Methodologies used were
uncoordinated and incomplete. Standards for data and methodology, and a recognised
measurement instrument, were needed to ensure that results from different studies were
comparable, and that trend data were meaningful. The Expert Group believed that, if
possible, the measurement instrument should:
• provide information on how many Australians attain the recommended ‘adequate’ level
of physical activity for health
• be suited to both self-administration and telephone interview
• be accurate, valid and reproducible
• preferably, be short.
A number of methods are available to measure physical activity levels (Montoye et al. 1996).
These include:
• self-report measures
• direct behavioural observation
• physiological testing
• indirect estimates of maximal or submaximal cardiorespiratory oxygen uptake
(e.g. via treadmill or cycle ergonometer tests)
• mechanical/electronic devices such as pedometers and motion sensors
• activity diaries.
There are issues regarding the use of each of these methods in population surveys. Direct
observation, physiological testing, treadmill/ergonometer tests and the use of electronic
devices have high-cost, time and acceptability implications in wide-scale application.
However they are useful for validating self-report measures. Activity diaries involve a large
amount of time and effort on the part of participants, and there are concerns that the act of
filling out such diaries may influence behaviour, therefore providing inaccurate results. Self-
report measures, while less accurate than other methods and subject to recall bias, are
relatively inexpensive, acceptable to survey participants, and can be adapted to suit CATI
techniques. After considering the issues surrounding each of the above methods, the Expert
Group decided that self-report measures were the most appropriate for population surveys.
23
Self-report measures
The Expert Group considered it important that:
• the questions be constructed so that they could include further investigation on matters
such as activity setting, whether activities were organised and whether they involved
individual or team sports (This was believed to be essential to sport and recreation and
associated sectors.)
• the use of the information for measuring/monitoring indicators for health outcomes,
such as in the National Health Priority Areas, be considered
• a core set of questions be developed which had the potential to be linked to a set of
more detailed questions
• any self-report measures developed be cross-validated (against other self-report
measures and, if possible, against more objective measures of activity).
Two of the main factors to be considered during the development of self-report measures
are the timeframe of recall and the activity types or categories of interest.
Commonly in self-report surveys, the recall period is short term, from 1 to 4 weeks.
Sometimes the previous year or, less often, lifetime activity levels are captured. Historically
in Australia a 2-week recall has been used; however, the Expert Group decided that this
should be changed to 1 week to be comparable with the latest international developments
(e.g. the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ)).
Types of activity to be included in a self-report measure can range from a complete listing,
with up to 100 activities, to subsets of these, to broad categorisation (e.g. walking, moderate
or vigorous activities).
Measures developed by the Expert Group

Initially two measures for assessing population levels of participation in physical activity
were developed by the Expert Group: an activity-specific questionnaire and a generic
questionnaire. These referred specifically to leisure-time physical activity and did not
include occupational activity (i.e. any activity undertaken during the course of paid or
unpaid employment) or incidental activity (i.e. the activities of daily living, such as those
relating to personal hygiene, or walking from one room to another). The Expert Group,
while acknowledging the probable importance of occupational and incidental activity to
overall energy expenditure, was unable to endorse their inclusion. Although there is some
evidence relating these activities to health benefit, the measures used to assess these
activities in epidemiological studies are not generally appropriate for use in population
surveys as they are typically long and time-consuming. Further, current national and
international physical activity guidelines and thresholds for health benefit are based on
leisure-time physical activity only. Many published studies also follow this reasoning,
stating, for example, that ‘Particular attention has been paid to leisure time activity because
few middle-aged men do physically demanding work and because, in public health terms,
occupational activity is not amenable to change’ (Shaper & Wannamethee 1991). The same is
true of women and other age groups.
While the Active Australia Survey does not include occupational physical activity its
walking question captures walking to get to and from places (i.e. for transport) as well as
walking as a leisure activity. These forms of walking are most likely to be associated with
24
health benefits, while walking at work in most cases is unlikely to be of sufficient intensity
or duration to influence health.
Activity-specific questionnaire
The activity-specific questionnaire captured (during the previous week):
• frequency, duration and self-rated intensity of walking
• type, frequency and duration of three most common vigorous activities
• type, frequency and duration of three most common moderate activities
• frequency, duration and self-rated intensity of household chores
• frequency, duration and self-rated intensity of gardening or yardwork.
For each activity type, it was decided to measure total time spent over the week rather than
time per session of activity. The Expert Group felt that this had the advantages of decreasing
recall bias, reducing arithmetical errors and increasing international comparability of the
data. Household chores and gardening/yardwork were included as separate questions
because their contribution to physical activity for health benefit is unclear and it was
therefore thought better to separate them from other activities.
The questionnaire was similar to that used in the 1990–91 Pilot Survey of the Fitness of
Australians (PSFA). Part of that survey captured frequency, duration and intensity of all
sport and recreational activities performed over the previous 2 weeks. Re-analysis of these
data by members of the Expert Group showed that there was little difference in prevalence
rates across numbers of activities when counting three activities or more, but a significant
drop in prevalence occurred when only two activities were counted. Therefore, the Expert
Group’s questionnaire was designed to capture a person’s three ‘most common’ activities.
Generic short-form questionnaire

The generic questionnaire recorded the frequency and duration over the previous week of:
• walking
• vigorous exercise
• household chores
• gardening or yardwork
• moderate activities.
Similarly to the activity-specific questionnaire, duration was recorded as total time in the
previous week, and gardening and household-chore activities were captured separately. The
generic questionnaire was very similar to tools being refined at the time in the United States
and Canada, and in fact the walking component of the questionnaire was later appropriated
for use in the US Behavioural Risk Factor Surveillance Study (BRFSS). The short form of the
IPAQ, which was circulated some months after the Expert Group’s generic questionnaire
was developed, proved to be much like the Australian survey.
As it is worded, the walking question captures walking as a leisure activity as well as
walking for transport. In this way moderate or brisk-paced walking, which is most likely to
be associated with health benefit, is captured rather than walking at work which in most
cases is unlikely to be of sufficient intensity or duration to influence health, and would be
subject to recall bias. Current opinion, along with evidence from two Australian studies (A
25
Hills personal communication; Gunn et al. 2002), suggest that this self-reported walking is
sufficiently intense to confer health benefit.
Pilot testing
Both questionnaires were tested in a pilot study run through the ABS Population Survey
Monitor in June–July 1997. The generic questionnaire was well received and understood,
though there was some confusion about what constituted ‘moderate’ activity. The ABS
reported that the questionnaire was easy to administer and elicited meaningful responses
from participants. The activity-specific questionnaire was also well received; however,
respondents seemed to have some difficulty estimating the intensity of their activities,
especially those around the house and yard. Some changes to the ordering of the questions
and the inclusion of examples of activity types in both questionnaires were suggested.
Because of the length of the activity-specific questionnaire and the need to produce an
instrument which could be used as a short telephone survey, the Expert Group decided to
discontinue its development and focus only on the generic questionnaire as a population
measure for developing data standards.
Validity and reliability

An early version of the generic questionnaire (where the same questions were asked but
applied to a 2-week recall period) was used as part of the 1994 and 1996 New South Wales
Health Promotion Surveys. The results were cross-validated against responses to specific-
activity questions (from the PSFA) which were asked in the same survey. Reports of the
number of sessions of moderate and vigorous activity correlated highly with those reported
in the activity-specific questions (r = 0.86 and 0.95, respectively), as did reported total time
spent in these activities (r = 0.97 and 0.89, respectively).
A reliability study conducted on the final version of the generic questionnaire (the National
Physical Activity Questions) found all items had good to excellent reliability, with intraclass
correlation coefficients from 0.71 to 0.86 and Spearman’s Rho from 0.54 to 0.77 (Bull 2000).
In 2001 the Department of Health and Aged Care (now Department of Health and Ageing)
funded further research into the psychometric properties of this and other physical activity
instruments. This found that the Active Australia questions exhibited good reliability and
acceptable validity (Brown et al. 2002).
Assessment of ‘adequate’ (or ‘sufficient’) activity

It was initially intended that the duration of each activity be multiplied by its MET value*
and individual body mass to produce estimates of weekly energy expenditure (kcal/wk)
over and above the energy expended through ‘normal’ living activities. These energy
expenditure estimates would then be used to determine if a person was ‘adequately’ active
for health using a threshold value of 800 kcal/wk, in line with the recommendation of the
US Surgeon General. However, it was noted that this method biases against those of lighter
weight; five 30-minute sessions of moderate exercise for a 65 kg person equates to 569 kcal,
whereas the same amount of activity for a person weighing 95 kg equates to 831 kcal. In this
case, the heavier person would be classed as undertaking ‘adequate’ activity, but the lighter
*1 MET = the resting metabolic rate, equivalent to oxygen uptake of 3.5 mL/kg/hr. For the purposes
of this assessment, walking and moderate activities were defined as having an energy expenditure
rate equivalent to 3.5 METs and vigorous activities as 9.0 METs.
26
person would not. Therefore, the Expert Group explored the concept of METmins—an
estimate of energy expenditure independent of body weight. Calculation of METmins
involves multiplying the MET value of a particular activity by its duration in minutes over
the week. This means that in the above example both people would have undertaken 525
METmins of activity, regardless of their different weights.
However, the use of energy expenditure estimates of any form has problems, as they ideally
need to be adjusted not only for body weight but also for age. This is because an older
person generally cannot perform activities at the same intensity as a younger person. METs
are a function of oxygen uptake and therefore reflect maximal uptake (VO2max). For a 25-
year-old, the PSFA estimated VO2max at 43 mL/kg/min. Thus a vigorous activity, estimated
at 9.0 METs, is performed at 73% of VO2max. Compare this with a person aged 70 whose
estimated VO2max is 30 mL/kg/min. To perform a 9.0 MET activity this person would need
to sustain an oxygen uptake of 105% of their VO2max—an impossible task. Hence, using a
value of 9.0 METs for vigorous activity for all ages would result in an over-estimate of
energy expenditure in older people.
The Expert Group therefore decided not to rely on estimates of energy expenditure to assess
whether adequate activity was being undertaken, but instead chose to compare the duration
of activity to the amount recommended in national and international guidelines. The
evidence-based National Physical Activity Guidelines for Australians (DHAC 1999) suggest
that, to obtain a health benefit, 30 minutes of moderate activity should be undertaken on
most days of the week, and that more vigorous activity will result in greater benefits. The
criteria for ‘adequate’ physical activity were therefore redefined as accumulating 150
minutes (5 x 30 minutes) of moderate activity or 90 minutes of vigorous activity per week.
These levels approximate the 800 kcal/wk energy expenditure suggested previously.
Further, 90 minutes (or 3 x 30 minutes) of vigorous activity reflected the earlier physical
activity and health message of the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM 1975).
Because the relationship between physical activity and health appears to be a dose–response
gradient, any particular level of activity is better than a lower level in terms of health benefit.
However, these thresholds for ‘adequate’ activity were chosen, based on epidemiological
evidence, as representing a level associated with a significant reduction in both all-cause
mortality and the development of and mortality due to diseases such as coronary heart
disease, colon and breast cancers, and type 2 diabetes mellitus.
The data standards—submission to the National Health Data Committee

The Expert Group identified a set of data elements relating to physical activity and
developed an entry (or definition) for each one for inclusion in the NHDD. These elements
represent discrete components which, when combined, completely describe participation in
physical activity. Four draft elements (frequency; duration; intensity; and adequate
frequency, duration and intensity) were first submitted to the National Health Data
Committee (NHDC) in May 1999. The NHDC were generally pleased with the elements and
suggested some revisions, including the addition of an ‘activity type’ element. The revised
five elements were resubmitted to the NHDC and circulated for national consultation (see
below) in July 1999. Some further revisions were made, notably the removal of household
chores as an activity type of interest. This was due to a lack of evidence showing that this
type of activity provides a health benefit, and the fact that household chores are not
commonly reported as physical activities in surveys. In addition, the ‘adequate’ element was
renamed to ‘Physical activity—health benefit’. In September–October 1999 further
27
consideration by the NHDC resulted in the addition of one further element, namely the
context of activity, and the recommendation that the elements be included as draft data
elements in the National Health Information Knowledgebase. The NHDC were, however,
not in agreement that the elements in their current form should be included in the NHDD.
The consultation process

In July 1999, the draft data standards (the elements and proposed questionnaire) were
circulated for comment and endorsement to 172 individuals. They included representatives
of the Commonwealth, state and territory governments, non-government organisations,
professional bodies and consumer groups, as well as public health researchers,
epidemiologists and other relevant individuals (Appendix 3). Forty-one replies were
received; 21 endorsed the standards, 4 did not, and the remainder did not specifically make
a statement regarding endorsement. The concerns of the four respondents who did not
endorse the standards were related to:
• the apparent lack of evidence for the impact of physical activity on health
• the non-inclusion of occupational activity
• concerns that endorsement at the time would slow the impetus of further work.
In response to the comments received, the Expert Group made a number of changes to the
data elements and survey instrument. These included:
• stressing that the data elements and survey questions relate primarily to leisure-time
physical activity
• changing the criterion for ‘adequate’ activity for health benefit (now generally referred
to as ‘sufficient activity’) so that it was defined as accumulating a total of
150 minutes of activity per week, with the duration calculated by summing the time
spent in walking and moderate and vigorous activities, where vigorous activity is
weighted by a factor of two to account for its higher intensity
• removing all reference to housework as a type of physical activity to be measured.
5.3 Current status of the proposed data standards
The physical activity questions

The current version of the Active Australia Survey (see Section 2), proposed in late 1999,
incorporates changes made in response to comments from the national consultation process.
The survey consists of five statements about physical activity to assess knowledge of public
health messages, and eight questions capturing the frequency and duration over the
previous week of:
• walking, for at least 10 minutes continuously, for recreation, exercise, or transport
• vigorous gardening or heavy work around the yard
• vigorous physical activities (excluding gardening, yardwork and household chores)
• moderate physical activities (excluding walking, gardening, yardwork and household
chores).
The questions in this format (with or without additional questions assessing household
activities) have so far been used in three national surveys (1997, 1999 and 2000) and several
28
state surveys, including Queensland (2001), New South Wales (1996–2001), Victoria (1997),
Western Australia (1999) and South Australia (1998, 2001).
In 2001, two projects assessing the validity and reliability of the Active Australia questions
and other international measurement instruments were funded by the Department of Health
and Aged Care. The key recommendation of these projects was:
The measurement properties (test-retest reliability, convergent validity and criterion
validity) of the Active Australia survey are as good as those of any of the surveys
assessed in this series of studies. For this reason, and because this survey has been used
in three consecutive population surveys in Australia, it is recommended that this survey
be adopted for continuing population monitoring of physical activity (PA) in Australia.
(Brown et al. 2002)
The data elements

The data elements proposed for physical activity are the data concept of Physical Activity,
the five related data elements of context, duration, frequency, intensity and type of physical
activity, and a derived data element of physical activity—health benefit. These standards are
defined as follows:
• Physical activity (data concept): Physical activity may be defined as ‘any bodily
movement produced by skeletal muscles that results in energy expenditure’ (Caspersen
et al. 1985). This includes exercise, sport, active recreation, fitness, incidental activity,
and active living. The majority of data collected in population surveys refers to leisure-
time physical activity since methods to measure other forms of activity are not yet well
developed.
• Physical activity—context: The context in which a person participates in physical
activity (i.e. leisure time or other).
• Physical activity—duration: The length of time spent participating in physical activity
as self-reported by an adult person (measured in minutes over a period of
1 week).
• Physical activity—frequency: The number of times an adult person self-reported
participating in physical activity (over a period of 1 week).
• Physical activity—intensity: The self-perceived and self-reported intensity at which an
adult person participated in physical activity (i.e. moderate or vigorous). Moderate
physical activity increases heart rate but does not necessarily make a person puff or
pant. Moderate-intensity activities include walking, golf, gentle swimming and social
tennis. Information on walking is included as a moderate activity. Vigorous physical
activities generally make a person breathe harder or puff and pant and include activities
such as jogging, cycling, aerobics, competitive tennis and hockey.
• Physical activity—type: The specific physical activities self-reported by adults
(i.e. walking, gardening and yardwork, or other).
• Physical activity—health benefit: Participation in walking and leisure-time physical
activity of sufficient intensity and duration to confer a health benefit.
The derived data element pertaining to health benefit is denoted as adequate or inadequate
(in practice, generally referred to as ‘sufficient’ and ‘insufficient’) after calculating a person’s
total activity level from the duration and intensity definitions. The number of minutes spent
in walking, moderate and vigorous leisure-time activities (not including gardening and
29
yardwork) are summed, with vigorous activity being weighted by a factor of two to account
for its greater intensity. Total leisure-time activity of 150 minutes per week or more is
considered to be sufficient to obtain health benefit. The extra element measuring frequency
can be used to assess a person’s activity level against the National Physical Activity
Guidelines which recommend activity be undertaken on most days of the week.
The data elements are still classified as ‘draft’ in the Knowledgebase. They have not been
entered into the NHDD, because of concerns raised by the NHDC that the elements do not
capture all the desirable aspects of physical activity and that some members had not had
sufficient time and information to consider the proposed elements. They were also
concerned that once the data elements were included in the dictionary it could be difficult to
alter them should better measures become available. It is, however, possible to make
alterations to data elements in the NHDD.
These data elements are generic and applicable not just to the Active Australia Survey but to
most of the instruments currently used to measure physical activity both in Australia and
around the world. They would require little or no modification should, for example, the
IPAQ or the US BRFSS questions be used to measure population activity levels. During
2001–02, the Department of Health and Ageing worked with other interested parties,
including the Computer Assisted Telephone Interview Health Surveys Technical Reference
Group (CATI-TRG), to revise and eventually resubmit the physical activity data elements for
inclusion in the NHDD.
30
Appendix 1: Example of CATI survey coding
An extract from the methods and coding manual used in the 1999 National Physical Activity
Survey is included in this section as an example of the implementation of the Active
Australia Survey in a CATI setting.
31
An extract from:
1999 Physical Activity Survey

National Physical Activity Survey
Methods, Coding Manual and

Questionnaire
Prepared for the

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare
By
The Hunter Valley Research Foundation
A.C.N. 000 185 393
Downie Street, Maryville, NSW 2293

Telephone: (049) 69 4566
Facsimile: (049) 61 4981
December 1999
The information herein is believed to be reliable and accurate. However, no responsibility or liability for the contents, or
any consequence of its use, will be accepted by The Hunter Valley Research Foundation or the Foundation staff
involved in its preparation
32
Completed interview databases
Notes: A field containing -1 indicates that the question was not asked. This occurred
whenever a question(s) was (were) skipped as part of the questioning process.
Field name: ID
Field type: Numeric
Content: The ID number given to each randomly chosen telephone number. The
ID for each number did not change during the interview process.
Therefore, the ID field can be used to link the response rate database
(AUS99RR.DBF) with the completed interview databases (AUS99.DBF
and NSW99AGE.DBF).
PHONE NO. IS {instruction to interviewer}
Hello, is this ‘phone number’?
Hello, my name is …, I’m calling on behalf of … We are conducting a national study on

physical activity.
[READ FOLLOWING PARAGRAPH IF HELPFUL.]
The research results will be important for the planning of future health and exercise
programs in your local area. Your telephone number has been selected randomly from the
White Pages. A member of your household will be asked to answer a few questions over the
phone.
{Selection of required household member}
WHEN REQUIRED PERSON IS ON PHONE ASK:
33
Hello, are you (RESPONDENT'S NAME)? My name is … I’m calling on behalf of … We are
conducting a national study on physical activity.
The research results will be important for the planning of future health and exercise
programs. All that is involved is answering a few questions over the phone. Your answers
will be kept confidential. We don’t need to know your name and no individuals will be
identified or described in any reports. [If there are any questions you prefer not to answer
just say so.]
The survey should take NO MORE THAN 15 minutes. Can you help us with this study?
[IF YES] Is it OK to talk to you now?
When would be the best time to call back to speak to you?
RECORD ON THE LOG SHEET.
{Additional questions—omitted here}
We would like to ask you about the physical activity you did in the last week:
Question: Q8. IN THE LAST WEEK how many times have you walked
continuously, for at least 10 minutes, for recreation, exercise or to get
to or from places?
Field name: Q8
Field type: Numeric
Content: # number of times
99 = Don’t know—use only as an absolute last resort
If: Q8 = 0, skip to Q12
34
Question: Q9. What do you estimate was the total time that you spent walking in
this way IN THE LAST WEEK? [INTERVIEWER: THIS IS
‘CONTINUOUS’ WALKING]
Field names: Q9M Q9H
Field type: Numeric Numeric
Content: Minutes Hours
77 = Don’t know 777 = Don’t know
If: Q9M < 1 AND Q9H < 1, skip to Q9m
Program check—interview could not proceed without an

answer
Question: Q12. IN THE LAST WEEK how many times did you do any vigorous
gardening or heavy work around the yard, which made you breathe
harder or puff and pant?
Field name: Q12
Field type: Numeric
Question: Q13. What do you estimate was the total time that you spent doing
vigorous gardening or heavy work around the yard IN THE LAST
WEEK?
Field name: Q13M Q13H
35

answer
The next question excludes household chores or gardening or yardwork:
Question: Q14. IN THE LAST WEEK, how many times did you do any vigorous
physical activity which made you breathe harder or puff and pant?
(e.g. jogging, cycling, aerobics, competitive tennis)
Field name: Q14
Field type: Numeric
this vigorous physical activity IN THE LAST WEEK?

answer
36
The next question excludes household chores or gardening or yardwork:
Question: Q16. IN THE LAST WEEK how many times did you do any other
more moderate physical activity that you have not already mentioned?
(e.g. gentle swimming, social tennis, golf)
Field name: Q16
Field type: Numeric
If: Q16 = 0, skip to Q9m
these activities IN THE LAST WEEK?
Content: # minutes # hours

answer
37
{The following statements were presented in RANDOM order:}
Question: Q19. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following
statements about physical activity and health? [READ OUT SCALE]:
Field name: Q19P1 = Taking the stairs at work or generally being more active
for at least 30 minutes each day is enough to improve
your health.
Q19P2 = Half an hour of brisk walking on most days is enough to

improve your health.
Q19P3 = To improve your health, it is essential for you to do

vigorous exercise for at least 20 minutes each time, three
times a week.
Q19P4 = Exercise doesn’t have to be done all at one time—blocks

of 10 minutes are okay.
Q19P5 = Moderate exercise that increases your heart rate slightly

can improve your health.
Field type: Numeric
Content: 1 = Strongly agree
2 = Agree
3 = Neither agree nor disagree
4 = Disagree
5 = Strongly disagree
6 = Don’t know [Do not read]
9 = Refused [Do not read]
{Additional questions and demographic data collection}
That ends our survey. Thank you very much for your help.
38
Question: [INTERVIEWER: USE THE FOLLOWING FIELD TO DESCRIBE ANY
UNUSUAL ASPECTS OF THIS RESPONDENT OR HIS/HER
ACTIVITIES.]
Field name: QCOM
Field type: Character
Content: Used when the respondent noted issues/characteristics which might

have influenced the survey answers. For example ‘respondent is a
farmer—walks 5 kilometres every day’.
Field name: COMMENTS
Field type: Character
Content: Interviewer comments about the interview
39
Appendix 2: Membership of the Expert
Working Group
Membership of the Expert Working Group, as at last meeting, August 1999:
Professor Adrian Bauman (Chair) Epidemiology Unit, University of New South
Wales
Dr Tim Armstrong National Centre for Monitoring Cardiovascular
Disease, Australian Institute of Health and
Welfare
Dr Michael Booth Centre for Advancement of Adolescent Health,
New Children’s Hospital
Dr Wendy Brown Research Institute for Gender and Health,
University of Newcastle
Dr Billie Corti Department of Public Health, University of
Western Australia
Mr Peter Crowe Health Section, Australian Bureau of Statistics
Professor Terence Dwyer AM Menzies Centre for Population Health Research,
University of Tasmania
Dr Ian Ford Research and Evaluation Coordinator,
Australian Sports Commission
Dr Chris Gore Laboratory Standards Assistance Scheme,
Australian Institute of Sport
Ms Penny Graham Primary Prevention Unit, Commonwealth
Department of Health and Aged Care
Professor Andrew Hills Department of Human Movement Studies,
Queensland University of Technology
Professor Neville Owen School of Nutrition and Public Health, Deakin
University
40
Appendix 3: Parties invited to be part of the national
consultation process
Input was received from those parties in bold type.
Dr Peter Abernethy Department of Human Movement Studies,
University of Queensland
Dr Michael Ackland Epidemiology Unit, Public Health Branch (Vic.)
Dr Michael Ackland Chair, National CATI-TRG
Ms Sue Baker-Finch Chief Executive Officer, Australian Division of
General Practice (ACT)
Ms Jeanette Baldwin Manager National Diabetes Strategies, Diabetes
Australia
Mr Bill Bellew Director, Health Promotion, NSW Department
of Health
Dr David Ben-Tovin Clinical Epidemiology and Health Outcomes
Unit, Flinders Medical Centre
Ms Colleen Bichel Centre for General Practice Integration Studies,
School of Community Medicine, University of
New South Wales
Professor Colin Binns School of Public Health, Curtin University of
Technology
Ms Jo Blunt Education Support Evaluation (Qld)
Dr Ron Borland Anti-Cancer Council of Victoria
Ms Kelli Brown Top End Division of General Practice
Dr Mark Brown Department of Biomedical Science, University of
Wollongong
Mr Doug Browning Weight Management Code Administration
Council of Australia
Dr Fiona Bull Department of Public Health, University of
Western Australia
Mr Ron Burns Confederation of Australian Sport
Professor Ian Caterson Human Nutrition Unit, Department of
Biochemistry, University of Sydney
Professor John Catford Director of Public Health, Department of
Human Services (Vic.)
Ms Michelle Charlton General Practice Branch, Department of Health
and Aged Care
Mr Joe Christensen Data Management Unit, Australian Institute of
Health and Welfare
Dr Glenn Close Western Sydney Area Division of Health
A/Professor Stephen Colagiuri Australian Diabetes Society, Department of
Endocrinology, Prince of Wales Hospital
Dr John Condon Epidemiology and Statistics Branch, Territory
Health Services
Dr Bill Coote Australian Medical Association
41
Ms Sue Cornes Epidemiology & Health Information Branch,
Queensland Department of Health
Dr David Crawford Faculty of Health and Behavioural Sciences,
Deakin University
Mr Owen Curtis Department of Biomedical Science, University of
Wollongong
Mr Edouard d’Espaignet Epidemiology Branch, Territory Health Services
Mr Jim Daly Manager, Economic and Industry, Recreation
Sport and Racing (SA)
Ms Alison Daly Performance Measurement and Health
Outcomes, Health Department of Western
Australia
Mr Robert de Castella SmartStart
Ms Deirdre Degeling Director, Health Promotion, Heart Foundation
of Australia (NSW Division)
Professor Annette Dobson Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and
Biostatistics, University of Newcastle
Ms Vanessa Doherty Health Promotion Coordinator, Southern
Division of General Practice (SA)
Mr Jim Dolman Office for Recreation, Sport and Racing (SA)
Ms Carmel Donnelly Manager, Information Development, NSW
Department of Health
Professor Robert Douglas Director, National Centre for Epidemiology and
Population Health, Australian National
University
Ms Ann Dragon WA Ministry of Sport and Recreation
Ms Gillian Duncan Sport, Recreation and Racing (Vic.)
Dr David Dunstan International Diabetes Institute
Dr Garry Egger Centre for Health Promotion and Research
Mr Jeffrey Emmel National Executive Director, Australian
Council for Health, Physical Education and
Recreation
Ms Lyn Fleming Executive Director, Public Health Association
Mr Simon Forest Executive Director, Office for Recreation, Sport
and Racing (SA)
Mr John Furhmann Acting Executive Director, WA Ministry of Sport
and Recreation
Mr Richard Galton NT Department of Sport and Recreation
Mr Bill Gillooly Director General, NSW Department of Sport and
Recreation
Ms Kathleen Graham Primary Prevention Unit, Department of Health
and Aged Care
Dr Phil Hamdorf Centre for Physical Activity in Ageing,
Hampstead Rehabilitation Centre (SA)
Mr Glenn Hamlyn National Culture/Leisure Statistics Unit,
Australian Bureau of Statistics
42
Dr Graeme Hankey Department of Neurology, Royal Perth
Hospital
Professor Mark Harris Director, General Practice Unit, Fairfield
Hospital (NSW)
Dr Noel Hayman Inala Community Centre (Qld)
Professor Richard Heller Professor of Community Medicine and Clinical
Epidemiology, University of Newcastle
Ms Michele Herriot Manager Health Promotion Unit, SA
Department of Human Services
Dr David Hill Director Centre for Behavioural Research in
Cancer, Anti-cancer Council of Victoria
A/Professor Michael Hobbs Department of Public Health, University of
Western Australia
Ms Vivienne Hobson Manager Food and Nutrition Unit, Territory
Health Services
Mr Arnold Puggy Hunter Chairperson, National Aboriginal Community
Controlled Health Organisation
Dr Konrad Jamrozik Department of Public Health, University of
Western Australia
Ms Jenny Jeffreson Director, General Practice Branch, Department
of Health and Aged Care
Dr Louisa Jorm NSW Department of Health
Ms Wilawan Kanjanapan Commonwealth Department of Health and
Aged Care
Mr Terry Kearney Chairman, Recreation Council of Australia
Mr Ross Kennedy Executive Director, Sport, Recreation and
Racing (Vic.)
Mr Ian Kett Executive Director, VICFIT
Mr Arthur Konstad Office for Recreation, Sport and Racing (SA)
Dr Steve Larkin Chief Executive Officer, National Aboriginal
Community Controlled Health Organisation
A/Professor Christina Lee Women’s Health Australia, University of
Newcastle
Professor Stephen Leeder Department of Community Medicine,
Westmead Hospital
Ms Eva Leslie Research Coordinator, Physical and Health
Program, School of Health Sciences, Deakin
University
Ms Jeanette Lewis Manager, Information and Statistics,
Department of Community and Health Services
Ms Ceciclia Lim Bikesouth, SA Department of Transport
Dr John Litt Department of Evidence Based Care, Noarlunga
Hospital
Ms Melanie Little NT Department of Sport and Recreation
A/Professor Doune Macdonald Department of Human Movement Studies,
University of Queensland
43
Dr Geoff Marks Director, Nutrition Program, University of
Queensland
Ms Cristy Massingham NSW Department of Sport and Recreation
Mr Colin McDougal Course Coordinator, Master of Primary Health
Care, Flinders University
Ms Robyn Miller Manager Nutrition Program, Health
Department (WA)
Ms Kate Moore Executive Director, Consumers’ Health Forum
of Australia
Ms Elizabeth Moss Information Development, Territory Health
Services
Mr Lucio Nacarrella Coordinator, Public Health and Health
Innovation SEPU
Mr Theo Neumann Ass. Dir. Population Survey Monitor, Australian
Bureau of Statistics
Ms Kim Nichols ACT Government Bureau of Sport and
Recreation
A/Professor Kevin Norton School of Physical Education, Exercise and
Sports Studies, University of South Australia
Professor Don Nutbeam Professor of Public Health, University of Sydney
Mr John O’Brien Director, Information Management, South
Australian Health Commission
Dr Brian Oldenburg School of Public Health, Queensland University
of Technology
Ms Henny Oldenhove Director, Participation Division, Australian
Sports Commission
Dr Timothy Olds Human Bioenergetics Laboratory, University of
New South Wales
Mr Mark Owens General Manager, ACT Government Bureau of
Sport and Recreation
Mr Robbie Parker Chairperson, Fitness Australia
Prof Hedley Peach Department of Health and Community
Medicine, The University of Melbourne
Ms Michelle Peuch Public Health Officer, NSW Health
Department
Dr Louis Pilotto Clinical Epidemiology and Health Outcomes
Unit, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital
Dr Gayle Pollard Senior Analyst, Epidemiology Services,
Queensland Health (CATI representative)
Ms Jenny Purtell Heart Foundation of Australia, Kings Meadow
Community Health Centre (Tas.)
Mrs Yvonne Rate Australian Sports Commission
Ms Marelle Rawson Director, Health Statistics Section, Australian
Bureau of Statistics
Ms Myree Rawsthorne ACT Department of Health and Community
Care
44
Ms Angela Reddy Head, Health Priorities and Outcomes Section,
Department of Health and Family Services
Mr Matthew Reid Chief Executive Officer, Sports Medicine
Australia
Dr Ian Ring Epidemiology and Prevention Unit,
Queensland Department of Health
Dr Lyn Roberts Health Development and Delivery, Heart
Foundation of Australia
Dr David Roder Director Epidemiology Branch, South Australian
Health Commission
Ms Fidelma Rogers Director, Primary Prevention Section,
Department of Health and Aged Care
Professor Ari Rotem Director, Centre for Public Health, University of
New South Wales
Dr Lori Rubenstein Department of Human Services (Tas.)
Ms Trish Ryan Data Management Unit, Australian Institute of
Health and Welfare
Dr David Scrimgeour Menzies Centre for Health Research (NT)
Ms Jane Seberry Physical Activity Coordinator, Heart
Foundation of Australia (NSW Division)
Mr Tony Sedgewick Head, Institute for Fitness Research and
Training (SA)
Dr Bruce Shadbolt Director Epidemiology and Population Health,
Department of Health and Community Care
(ACT)
Ms Noella Sheerin GP Support Officer, Heart Foundation of
Australia (NSW Division)
Mr Tony Sheppard NSW Police Service
Mr Mike Shetter Office for Recreation, Sport and Racing (SA)
Mr Trevor Shilton Heart Foundation of Australia, Western
Australia Division
Mr Colin Sindall Population Health Division, Department of
Health and Aged Care
Dr Ben Smith Manager, Active Practice Project, Epidemiology
Unit, Liverpool Hospital
Dr Merran Smith General Manager, Epidemiology Unit, Health
Department (WA)
Mr Fred Smith Executive Director, Office of Sport and
Recreation (Qld)
Dr Simon Spedding Royal Australian College of General
Practitioners
Mr Paul Sproule Director, Office of Sport and Recreation (Tas.)
Dr Don Staines Manager, Southern Public Health Unit
Network (Qld)
Ms Alison Standen Menzies Centre for Population Health Research,
University of Tasmania
45
Mr Gary Starr Centre for Population Studies and
Epidemiology, C/- Department of Human
Services (SA)
Ms Kate Steinbeck Metabolism and Obesity Clinic (NSW)
Prof Len Storlien Dean of Faculty of Health and Behavioural
Science, University of Wollongong
Mr Alan Sutherland Health Promotion Policy Officer, Department
of Health and Human Services (Tas.)
Mr Martin Sweeney Medical Education Coordinator, RACGP
Mr Martin Sweeney VICFIT
Ms Susan Tabak Physical Activity Manager, Department of
Ms Anne Taylor Manager, SERCIS, Epidemiology Branch,
Department of Human Services (SA)
Ms Jenny Thomas Assistant Secretary, Health Service Outcomes
Branch, Department of Health and Family
Services (ACT)
Dr Neil Thompson Director Epidemiology Branch, Health
Department (WA)
Professor Andrew Tonkin Director Health, Medical and Scientific Affairs,
National Heart Foundation
Mr Martin Turnbull Manager Health Enhancement, Department of
Ms Loretta Vaughan Epidemiology Section, Department of Human
Services (Vic.)
Mr Phillip Vita A/Manager Sun Exposure, Nutrition and
Physical Activity, NSW Department of Health
Professor Mark Wahlqvist Monash Medical Centre
Dr Melanie Wakefield Epidemiology Branch, South Australian Health
Commission
Mr Peter Wallace Chief Executive Officer, National Heart
Foundation
Dr Peter Wan Head, Epidemiology Unit, Department of
Health and Human Services (Tas.)
Ms Nicole Watson Epidemiology Section, Department of Human
Services (Vic.)
Dr Karen Webb Senior Lecturer in Public Health Nutrition,
Department of Public Health and Community
Medicine, Westmead Hospital
Ms Char Weeks Office of the Secretary-General, Royal
Australian College of General Practitioners
Mr Mark Williams Senior Project Officer, SA Department of
Human Services
Ms Margaret Williamson Manager, Health Survey Program, NSW
Department of Health
Ms Shirley Willis Australian Sports Commission
46
Dr David Wilson Head of Centre for Population Studies and
Epidemiology, C/- Department of Human
Services (SA)
Dr Robert Withers Reader in Exercise Physiology, School of
Education, Flinders University
Ms Elizabeth Woods Office of Sport and Recreation (Qld)
Dr Tony Worsley Professor of Community Medicine, University
of Adelaide
Ms Sue Wragge Office of Sport and Recreation (Tas.)
Ms Cheryl Wright National Physical Activity Program Director,
Heart Foundation
Professor Paul Zimmet International Diabetes Institute
Health Promotion Foundation of Western Australia
Health Promotion Foundation of the Australian Capital Territory
Health Promotion Foundation of South Australia
Health Promotion Foundation of Victoria
47
Bibliography
AIHW (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare): Dixon T unpublished. The Active
Australia physical activity questions—a history of the development of questions and related
data elements for measuring physical activity in Australian adults, 1997–2000. Canberra:
AIHW.
AIHW (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare) forthcoming. Australia’s health risk
factor update.
Ainsworth AE, Haskell WL, Whitt MC, et al. 2000. Compendium of physical activities: an
update of activity codes and MET intensities. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise
32(9 Suppl): S498–S504.
ACSM (American College of Sports Medicine) 1975. Guidelines for graded exercise testing
and exercise prescription. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger.
Armstrong T, Bauman A & Davies J 2000. Physical activity patterns of Australian adults.
Results of the 1999 national physical activity survey. Canberra: Australian Institute of Health
and Welfare.
ASC (Australian Sports Commission) 1998. Active Australia National Physical Activity
Survey 1997. Canberra: ASC.
Bauman A, Ford I & Armstrong T 2001. Trends in population levels of reported physical
activity in Australia 1997, 1999 and 2000. Canberra: Australian Sports Commission.
Booth M, Owen N, Bauman A & Gore C 1996. Relationship between a 14-day recall measure
of leisure-time physical activity and a submaximal test of physical work capacity in a
population sample of Australian adults. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 67(2):
221–227.
Booth M, Owen N, Bauman A & Gore C 1995. Active and inactive Australians—assessing
and understanding levels of physical activity. Canberra: Department of the Environment,
Sports and Territories.
Brown W, Bauman A, Timperio A, Salmon J & Trost S 2002. Measurement of adult physical
activity: reliability, comparison and validity of self-report surveys for population
surveillance. Summary and recommendations. Unpublished report to the Department of
Health and Ageing.
Bull FC 2000. The reliability and validity of recall of moderate-intensity physical activity.
Unpublished report to DHAC.
Caspersen CJ, Powell KE & Christenson GM 1985. Physical activity, exercise, and physical
fitness: definitions and distinctions for health-related research. Public Health Reports
100:126–31.
DASET (Department of the Arts, Sport, the Environment and Territories) 1992. Pilot survey
of the fitness of Australians. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.
DHAC (Department of Health and Aged Care) 1999. National physical activity guidelines for
Australians. Canberra: DHAC.
Gunn SM, Brooks AG, Withers RT, Gore CJ, Owen N, Booth ML & Bauman AE 2002.
Determining energy expenditure during some household and garden tasks. Medicine and
Science in Sports and Exercise 34(5):895–902.
Mathers C, Vos T & Stevenson C 1999. The burden of disease and injury in Australia. AIHW
Cat. no. PHE 17. Canberra: AIHW.
48
Montoye HJ, Kemper HCG, Saris WHM & Washburn RA 1996. Measuring physical activity
and energy expenditure. Champaign IL: Human Kinetics.
Shaper AG & Wannamethee G 1991. Physical activity and ischaemic heart disease in middle-
aged British men. British Heart Journal 66: 384–94.
Stephenson J, Bauman A, Armstrong T, Smith B & Bellew B 2000. The costs of illness
attributable to physical inactivity in Australia: a preliminary study. Canberra:
Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care and the Australian Sports
Commission.
USDHHS (United States Department of Health and Human Services) 1996. Physical activity
and health: a report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and
Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic
Disease Prevention and Health Promotion.
49

7Kh$Fwlyh$Xvwudold6Xuyh/: $jxlghdqgpdqxdoirulpsohphqwdwlrq Dqdo/Vlvdqguhsruwlqj

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

7Kh$Fwlyh$Xvwudold6Xuyh/: $jxlghdqgpdqxdoirulpsohphqwdwlrq Dqdo/Vlvdqguhsruwlqj

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

7KH$FWLYH$XVWUDOLD6XUYH\

3 Interviewer training and survey implementation............................................................5

4 Analysis and reporting of the survey data.......................................................................10

5 Background to the survey ...................................................................................................19

Appendix 1: Example of CATI survey coding ........................................................................31

Appendix 2: Membership of the Expert Working Group.....................................................40

Appendix 3: Parties invited to be part of the national consultation process ....................41

2.1 The Active Australia Survey

In hours and/or minutes

In hours and/or minutes

The next questions exclude household chores, gardening or yardwork:

In hours and/or minutes

In hours and/or minutes

3.1 The National Physical Activity Survey

3.2 Handy hints for users, researchers, interviewers and analysts

3.3 Annotated survey questions for interviewers

The next questions exclude household chores, gardening or yardwork:

4.1 Measures derived from the Active Australia Survey

4.2 Data structure

Participation in physical activity

Awareness of physical activity messages

Usual reporting method

Physical activity Men Women Persons

4.4 Total time spent in each activity

4.5 Average time spent in each activity

Overall population average

Average for people reporting participation

Usual reporting method

Walking Vigorous intensity

Males Females Males Females

Mean 125 143 70 54

75th percentile 160 165 85 68

4.6 Proportion of people doing ‘sufficient’ activity for health

Calculating total activity time

Calculating total activity sessions

Identifying people participating in ‘sufficient’ activity

(a) Sufficient time

(b) Sufficient time and sessions

Usual reporting method

Men 15.1 24.8 60.1

Persons 15.4 27.4 57.2

Age group (years)

18–29 8.7 39.6 51.7

4.7 Proportion of people who were sedentary

Usual reporting method

4.8 Awareness of physical activity messages

Usual reporting method

Men 84.6 87.7 70.1 71.6 94.6

5.1 Basis for data development

Why is physical activity important?

National data standards

The National Health Data Dictionary

The National Health Information Agreement

Terms of reference of the Expert Working Group on Physical Activity

Measurement of physical activity

Measures developed by the Expert Group

Generic short-form questionnaire

Validity and reliability

Assessment of ‘adequate’ (or ‘sufficient’) activity

The data standards—submission to the National Health Data Committee

The consultation process

5.3 Current status of the proposed data standards

The physical activity questions